Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Lowers batch size of input-reading stages in import #9341

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 16, 2017

Conversation

tinwelint
Copy link
Member

because the batches would be quite big for data that has a large
amount of property data and would risk out of memory. With this change
the batch size is around a couple of thosands, down from a couple of
tens of thousands (page size based)

because the batches would be quite big for data that has a large
amount of property data and would risk out of memory. With this change
the batch size is around a couple of thosands, down from a couple of
tens of thousands (page size based)
@@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ private void importRelationships( NodeRelationshipCache nodeRelationshipCache,

private static Configuration configWithRecordsPerPageBasedBatchSize( Configuration source, RecordStore<?> store )
{
return Configuration.withBatchSize( source, store.getRecordsPerPage() * 100 );
return Configuration.withBatchSize( source, store.getRecordsPerPage() * 10 );
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not making it configurable?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's always painful introducing a config option for something that should just work. I don't think there's any benefit with the 100x multiplier... measuring as we speak

@MishaDemianenko MishaDemianenko merged commit c6e4d6a into neo4j:3.1 May 16, 2017
@tinwelint tinwelint deleted the 3.1-import-lower-batch-size branch December 11, 2017 10:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants